The reason for this revision surgery was the ulna component broke through the skin and the surgeon having removed everything because he feared infection.The previous surgery and the revision detailed in this investigation occurred over 3.7 months apart.The healthcare professional indicated there was a significant adverse event to the patient.There was no delay in surgery and another suitable device was available for use.The revision surgery was completed as intended.The device was disposed of at the hospital and not made available to djo surgical for examination.A review of the device history records (dhr) provided by zimmer-biomet, shows that the reported components used in the previous surgery met design and manufacturing requirements.There were no non-conforming material reports (ncmrs) associated with the components that may have contributed to reported event.Attempts were made to obtain records to verify acceptable sterilization of the device(s), as of 24 mar 2017 no records from zimmer-biomet have been forwarded.The root cause of the ulna component having broken through the skin was reported as a fall.Inventory containment is not required as there are no indications of a product or process issue affecting implant safety or effectiveness.
|